/lit/ - Literature

>>11781498
>This doesn't change anything though, does it?
no, but i think it surprised a lot of NRx guys who were gearing up for another eight more years of hilary. trump opened the floodgates for the alt-right and land isn't there. the lines between NRx and AR are blurry but, as land said, the only people who didn't think he was a nazi were the nazis.

if you comb through his tweets you can suss out his thoughts on politics, they've recently been a lot of arcane crypto-gnostic mutterings of late. i really miss xenosystems and the chaos patches and the longer essays he used to write. bah.

>Can you expand a bit on this (eg what exactly is misunderstood)?
we're all going to die! aaaaaaahhh! robots are going to wipe us out! aaaaahh! they're going to steal our jobs, and when they're not stealing our jobs, we're going to be having sex with them!

that's basically it, in so many words. Old Nick utterly, utterly loathes leftist politics, which is to say, basically everything that can be traced back to martin luther. and conversely he cannot find a flaw in pic rel. this, for him, is how you run a state. for land most of the west is irredeemably infected with a cycle of leftist guilt-politics that only seems to become more disaster-cringe as time as goes on.

that human desire is *not* the final horizon of the possibilities that lay within capitalism is a big thing for him. capital itself is the revolutionary force, but the psychopolitics of cathedral progressivism betray all of its possibilities in favor of a guilt-politics that Young Nick would have called transcendental miserabilism and Old Nick simply wants to see collapse as soon as possible. he's a very dark futurist in that sense: the possibilities for capital inasmuch as it means intelligenesis (or, to use his word, teleoplexy) are limitless. what holds it down is *us*.

i strongly recommend you take a look at this essay. it's very short but is pretty much essential to understanding Old Nick.

>'Acceleration' as it is used here describes the time-structure of capital accumulation. It thus references the 'roundaboutness' founding Bohm-Bawerk's model of capitalization, in which saving and
technicity are integrated within a single social process-diversion of resources from immediate consumption into the enhancement of productive apparatus. Consequently, as basic co-components of capital, technology and economics have only a limited, formal distinctiveness under historical conditions of ignited capital escalation. The indissolubly twin-dynamic is techonomic (cross-excited commercial industrialism). Acceleration is techonomic time.

https://track5.mixtape.moe/zphjim.pdf

his view of the relationship of tech and economics is different than marx because land *really* gets rid of hegel, in one sense, and yet in another, brings him back in ways marx would never have expected. you know how they always say, 'marx stands hegel on his head?' land does the same thing, in a way.